![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
the state of the company store
Sep. 2nd, 2010 12:28 pmThe men I work for, they are good men. They have their eyes on the bottom line, of course (not to mention the clueless I-don't-know-and-don't-care-how-much-extra-work-this-whim-of-mine-will-cost-you attitude that a lot of upper-tier execs possess), but they're also ethical citizens, interested and invested in their employees' happiness and welfare, willing to pay to keep them safe and sound. And man, after some of the people I've worked for, that is nothing to sneeze at, you know? In fact, the Halcyon era I remember from my father's experience as a young workforce grunt in the seventies is long over; my bosses' attitude toward their workers (i.e., us) is rare in my experience, and becoming rarer.
I know this, am frequently reminded, have regular meetings with them about employee welfare, and so it's an easy thing for me to forget that they are conservative men running a conservative business in an extremely conservative field. But they are, they are all those things. And every now and then I get a smackdown in the form of a breakfast seminar where unions assume the looming, grisly malevolence of your very creepiest, most violently efficient horror film monster. Or a meeting where the company President has a mini-breakdown and figures Obama, in his rant, as an active agent of an economic apocalypse whose administration's most pressing goal (in a long list of unsavory goals) is to hack down as many businesses as possible.
It depresses me, to think that my bosses don't understand, or won't acknowledge, that unions and pro-labor government administrations exist and flourish because we need them to keep unscrupulous business owners from riding roughshod over their workers. We all know it, don't we? That in a blisteringly bad economy, corners get cut all the way around, and the first things to get cut are programs that insure employees, literally or figuratively, because they're considered luxuries and not necessities. Workers get thrown over the side to keep iceberg-hobbled businesses afloat. It's a fact. And unions, OSHA, EEOC, workers' comp insurance oversight, health care reforms, etc. serve as flotation devices by protecting the rights of the little people. They can be bad news indeed for a slipshod business, but if you're a conscientious employer, like my company, they aren't The Enemy. They never were.
(My company, for example, already practices and has always practiced many of the health care policy reforms coming into effect in the next couple of years. We have insurance, paid 100% by the company. We cover dependents, paid 100% by the company, although admittedly, with premiums skyrocketing, we'll likely have to start deducting payment subsidies for dependent premiums starting this year. We have a long-term medical leave policy that covers payments for an extended period, and riders are in place to make certain that even when our coverage period expires, an employee may stay on our insurance policy. But many companies don't, and would never, if they weren't forced to it.)
I don't think that these engines of change/enforcement are shining and flawless, by any means. But in the battle of profits v. compassion, I think it's pretty obvious which side I come down on, and I think my bosses come down on that side too, albeit in slightly more gingerly fashion. I just wish their theory were more in line with their practice, is all, that they put more thought into their knee-jerk BAD UNION NO BISCUIT response, that they acknowledged a government in place to support workers over Big Business doesn't have to be a business-breaker.
I know this, am frequently reminded, have regular meetings with them about employee welfare, and so it's an easy thing for me to forget that they are conservative men running a conservative business in an extremely conservative field. But they are, they are all those things. And every now and then I get a smackdown in the form of a breakfast seminar where unions assume the looming, grisly malevolence of your very creepiest, most violently efficient horror film monster. Or a meeting where the company President has a mini-breakdown and figures Obama, in his rant, as an active agent of an economic apocalypse whose administration's most pressing goal (in a long list of unsavory goals) is to hack down as many businesses as possible.
It depresses me, to think that my bosses don't understand, or won't acknowledge, that unions and pro-labor government administrations exist and flourish because we need them to keep unscrupulous business owners from riding roughshod over their workers. We all know it, don't we? That in a blisteringly bad economy, corners get cut all the way around, and the first things to get cut are programs that insure employees, literally or figuratively, because they're considered luxuries and not necessities. Workers get thrown over the side to keep iceberg-hobbled businesses afloat. It's a fact. And unions, OSHA, EEOC, workers' comp insurance oversight, health care reforms, etc. serve as flotation devices by protecting the rights of the little people. They can be bad news indeed for a slipshod business, but if you're a conscientious employer, like my company, they aren't The Enemy. They never were.
(My company, for example, already practices and has always practiced many of the health care policy reforms coming into effect in the next couple of years. We have insurance, paid 100% by the company. We cover dependents, paid 100% by the company, although admittedly, with premiums skyrocketing, we'll likely have to start deducting payment subsidies for dependent premiums starting this year. We have a long-term medical leave policy that covers payments for an extended period, and riders are in place to make certain that even when our coverage period expires, an employee may stay on our insurance policy. But many companies don't, and would never, if they weren't forced to it.)
I don't think that these engines of change/enforcement are shining and flawless, by any means. But in the battle of profits v. compassion, I think it's pretty obvious which side I come down on, and I think my bosses come down on that side too, albeit in slightly more gingerly fashion. I just wish their theory were more in line with their practice, is all, that they put more thought into their knee-jerk BAD UNION NO BISCUIT response, that they acknowledged a government in place to support workers over Big Business doesn't have to be a business-breaker.
